One day there will be computers and robots powerful enough and intelligent enough to do 95% of jobs. Will this be a good thing? Maybe it'll leave most people without a purpose in life.
It also would make a UBI funded by a robot tax inevitable
Why would the robots pay? No taxation without representation after all...
Their owners would be required to pay it for them, otherwise no UBI and 90% unemployment = revolution
One day there will be computers and robots powerful enough and intelligent enough to do 95% of jobs. Will this be a good thing? Maybe it'll leave most people without a purpose in life.
Eventually they will probably replace us and become the dominant species on the planet...
They will probably worry about how often the pet humans get eaten by the super-foxes.
There is not enough get Truss going in for my liking.
Since Sunday when my dad said he is backing Sunak but is convinced Truss is winning it I have had a 🤢 feeling.
As this is a betting site, we have to tell the betting world Truss is next PM?
I’m praying for Penny, to knock Truss out last two, but European land war and economic crisis no time for a novice is going to count against Penny isn’t it 😩
One day there will be computers and robots powerful enough and intelligent enough to do 95% of jobs. Will this be a good thing? Maybe it'll leave most people without a purpose in life.
It also would make a UBI funded by a robot tax inevitable
One day there will be computers and robots powerful enough and intelligent enough to do 95% of jobs. Will this be a good thing? Maybe it'll leave most people without a purpose in life.
It also would make a UBI funded by a robot tax inevitable
Why would the robots pay? No taxation without representation after all...
Their owners would be required to pay or for them
In our image we made robots for our slaves, Imagine all the time that we can save.
Kemi: "My government will discard the priorities of Twitter and deliver on the people's priorities."
Kemi: "Every quango leader should be sackable by a democratic minister."
She is literally insane. These issues are not important to anyone.
The quango'isation of government should be a concern - it is about removing accountability in the spending of public money using "independence" as a fig leaf. It also is quite handy in a chumocracy as a way to employ friends and family without the hassle of it being too obvious.
Is not another element the use of charitable status to gain tax advantages?
There is also a big problem with conflicts of interest, which are at the heart of a lot of scandals.
Still waiting for a better PM than Blair. He left office in 2007…
We've had 2 better PM's than Blair already since then. Cameron and Boris.
But if you're wanting a better Labour PM, you might need to wait until Labour are popular again. Perhaps Starmer's successor might do it?
ROFL Cameron and Johnson don’t have a candle on Blair. He did actual levelling up and actual positive change.
Johnson and Cameron divided the country and oversaw the largest stagnation in society in 100 years.
This would be the stagnation that has led to record low unemployment?
Record low but Kemi says more people are sitting around and doing nothing. Makes no sense.
Full employment where 40% of people on benefits are IN WORK.
As @BartholomewRoberts would point out if he was here - if you are on benefits there is absolutely zero point working beyond the point income is clawed back...
Problem is there is no easy way to fix that without seriously increasing the cut off point at which people can no longer claim benefits (probably to something like £40-45,000 from £30,000).
I can believe it. Do we think he can recover amongst members once it gets going?
I think Sunak will lose when it comes down to *whoever* is in the last two. The numbers seem to indicate that the "stop Sunak" vote is larger than the "pro Sunak" vote.
Still waiting for a better PM than Blair. He left office in 2007…
We've had 2 better PM's than Blair already since then. Cameron and Boris.
But if you're wanting a better Labour PM, you might need to wait until Labour are popular again. Perhaps Starmer's successor might do it?
ROFL Cameron and Johnson don’t have a candle on Blair. He did actual levelling up and actual positive change.
Johnson and Cameron divided the country and oversaw the largest stagnation in society in 100 years.
This would be the stagnation that has led to record low unemployment?
Record low but Kemi says more people are sitting around and doing nothing. Makes no sense.
Full employment where 40% of people on benefits are IN WORK.
As @BartholomewRoberts would point out if he was here - if you are on benefits there is absolutely zero point working beyond the point income is clawed back...
Problem is there is no easy way to fix that without seriously increasing the cut off point at which people can no longer claim benefits (probably to something like £40-45,000 from £30,000).
I can believe it. Do we think he can recover amongst members once it gets going?
I think Sunak will lose when it comes down to *whoever* is in the last two. The numbers seem to indicate that the "stop Sunak" vote is larger than the "pro Sunak" vote.
FWIW, my dad - who is not a member of the party, but might be a bit like quite a lot in the party - doesn't want it to be Sunak. He likes Mordaunt. The tax issue has cut through with him.
I think the problem Sunak has is that nobody is talking about the state of the public finances. That COVID has reset the equation has completely passed most people by.
All chief whips since '15 (excrpt heaton harris who stays neutral) backing RS. Suggests for him at least there is no obvious premiership ending skeleton the whips know of
Well Boris helpfully emptied out the cupboard of his skeletons when he was trying to undermine his own Chancellor a few months ago: the green card, the non dom wife etc,. He may, inadvertently, have done Rishi a favour because this is old news now.
There is not enough get Truss going in for my liking.
Since Sunday when my dad said he is backing Sunak but is convinced Truss is winning it I have had a 🤢 feeling.
As this is a betting site, we have to tell the betting world Truss is next PM?
I’m praying for Penny, to knock Truss out last two, but European land war and economic crisis no time for a novice is going to count against Penny isn’t it 😩
Kemi: "My government will discard the priorities of Twitter and deliver on the people's priorities."
Kemi: "Every quango leader should be sackable by a democratic minister."
She is literally insane. These issues are not important to anyone.
The quango'isation of government should be a concern - it is about removing accountability in the spending of public money using "independence" as a fig leaf. It also is quite handy in a chumocracy as a way to employ friends and family without the hassle of it being too obvious.
Is not another element the use of charitable status to gain tax advantages?
There is also a big problem with conflicts of interest, which are at the heart of a lot of scandals.
The layering - using multiple layers of NGOs, charities and Quangos to do things - is perfectly designed to obfuscate such conflicts of interest.
It likely will. I think it will be Rishi with most MPs against 'whoever' who thinks the party membership will back them per Con Home. I only see a deal if Rishi is squeezed out by MPs
One thing I would like the next PM to do is to place the various ethics advisors on a statutory footing, reporting to Parliament and give them the power to initiate investigations independently (with a proper professional team of investigators not civil servants doing this off the side of their desks). If they could get cross-party backing for these changes, so much the better.
You're just trying to get a job offer, aren't you? Head Investigator, Ethics.
Still waiting for a better PM than Blair. He left office in 2007…
We've had 2 better PM's than Blair already since then. Cameron and Boris.
But if you're wanting a better Labour PM, you might need to wait until Labour are popular again. Perhaps Starmer's successor might do it?
ROFL Cameron and Johnson don’t have a candle on Blair. He did actual levelling up and actual positive change.
Johnson and Cameron divided the country and oversaw the largest stagnation in society in 100 years.
This would be the stagnation that has led to record low unemployment?
Record low but Kemi says more people are sitting around and doing nothing. Makes no sense.
Full employment where 40% of people on benefits are IN WORK.
As @BartholomewRoberts would point out if he was here - if you are on benefits there is absolutely zero point working beyond the point income is clawed back...
Problem is there is no easy way to fix that without seriously increasing the cut off point at which people can no longer claim benefits (probably to something like £40-45,000 from £30,000).
In idle moments, I try and think of ways of *temporarily increasing benefits* to those who earn money while on benefits.
If insane marginal tax rates are just about dissuading people to work more, what would doubling the money they earn do?
Still waiting for a better PM than Blair. He left office in 2007…
We've had 2 better PM's than Blair already since then. Cameron and Boris.
But if you're wanting a better Labour PM, you might need to wait until Labour are popular again. Perhaps Starmer's successor might do it?
ROFL Cameron and Johnson don’t have a candle on Blair. He did actual levelling up and actual positive change.
Johnson and Cameron divided the country and oversaw the largest stagnation in society in 100 years.
This would be the stagnation that has led to record low unemployment?
Record low but Kemi says more people are sitting around and doing nothing. Makes no sense.
Full employment where 40% of people on benefits are IN WORK.
As @BartholomewRoberts would point out if he was here - if you are on benefits there is absolutely zero point working beyond the point income is clawed back...
Problem is there is no easy way to fix that without seriously increasing the cut off point at which people can no longer claim benefits (probably to something like £40-45,000 from £30,000).
Still waiting for a better PM than Blair. He left office in 2007…
We've had 2 better PM's than Blair already since then. Cameron and Boris.
But if you're wanting a better Labour PM, you might need to wait until Labour are popular again. Perhaps Starmer's successor might do it?
ROFL Cameron and Johnson don’t have a candle on Blair. He did actual levelling up and actual positive change.
Johnson and Cameron divided the country and oversaw the largest stagnation in society in 100 years.
This would be the stagnation that has led to record low unemployment?
Record low but Kemi says more people are sitting around and doing nothing. Makes no sense.
Full employment where 40% of people on benefits are IN WORK.
As @BartholomewRoberts would point out if he was here - if you are on benefits there is absolutely zero point working beyond the point income is clawed back...
Problem is there is no easy way to fix that without seriously increasing the cut off point at which people can no longer claim benefits (probably to something like £40-45,000 from £30,000).
I can believe it. Do we think he can recover amongst members once it gets going?
I think Sunak will lose when it comes down to *whoever* is in the last two. The numbers seem to indicate that the "stop Sunak" vote is larger than the "pro Sunak" vote.
Although you also need to bear mind that there will also be a substantial 'Stop Liz' vote. 'Stop Penny' perhaps less so, but she might well fade as members begin to realise how inexperienced she is in terms of top-level politics.
Tom Tugendhat is a bit of a wild card in all this, although also inexperienced.
There is not enough get Truss going in for my liking.
Since Sunday when my dad said he is backing Sunak but is convinced Truss is winning it I have had a 🤢 feeling.
As this is a betting site, we have to tell the betting world Truss is next PM?
I’m praying for Penny, to knock Truss out last two, but European land war and economic crisis no time for a novice is going to count against Penny isn’t it 😩
I think, putting 2 n 2 together from 12 month of chats, the group Dad hangs out with down the club have wanted Sunak as PM for about 12 months - because they are thoughtful and wants that better financial direction from top of government Boris never gave! But they are aware of lot of pro Boris anti Sunak in the club all around them this year 😔
In my opinion, it’s insane not to have a sane and detailed economic planning right at the top on number ten chalk board. Boris Johnson was just back of the fag packet economic strategy planning and bluster - the number 1 most important thing to change from his going is that isn’t it? What is the bleeping point if that don’t change 🤷♀️
There is not enough get Truss going in for my liking.
Since Sunday when my dad said he is backing Sunak but is convinced Truss is winning it I have had a 🤢 feeling.
As this is a betting site, we have to tell the betting world Truss is next PM?
I’m praying for Penny, to knock Truss out last two, but European land war and economic crisis no time for a novice is going to count against Penny isn’t it 😩
Penny has been Defence Secretary
Now you're on first-name terms, I think we know who you're backing!
One thing I would like the next PM to do is to place the various ethics advisors on a statutory footing, reporting to Parliament and give them the power to initiate investigations independently (with a proper professional team of investigators not civil servants doing this off the side of their desks). If they could get cross-party backing for these changes, so much the better.
You really are an optimist. But if ever there was a moment they might be pressured into such an idea it is now.
It is a brilliant idea. It would signal that they had really understood the lessons and it would shoot one of Labour's foxes. But it should be done regardless.
Honestly, they could do with listening to me on lots of things instead of the dimwit Spads they seem to rely on. They largely seem incapable of boiling an egg.
Its not just the 20mph, its the blanket nature of the policy. Absolutely no need for it to be 20mph at 3am...the argument about runners or kids, there isn't any at that time.
The US system of having 30mph, then at certain times e.g. school times, its 20mph seems a perfectly sensible comprise.
It isn't really a blanket policy, though:
The Welsh government have acknowledged the new lower limit won't be appropriate everywhere and local authorities can make exceptions, though not outside schools.
And the autonomy can only be increased in the process, I think.
Think about all the money that will no longer need to be spent on traffic calming, and cane be spent more usefully.
Lets see, I bet its 20mph basically everywhere, as the argument will always be think of the kids...its like new temporary taxes, they only ever become permanent and go up.
I'd say that I would quite like a blanket-except-for-through-routes 20mph - eg in London, except for Red Routes.
But the real future is segregation of modes, plus limiting motor-vehicles in shared spaces so that mixing is safe for others.
The safety issue is exaggerated by the cycling lobby. That is not to say that there are no safety issues when it comes to the interaction between two wheeled vehicles and those with 4 or more.
But the number of cycling fatalities has been falling in the UK for a long time even though cycling has been increasing.
The cycling lobby here in Oxford almost seem to relish a tragic accident. One of their number collects old bikes, sprays them white and ties them up next to the site of the accident within hours.
Road deaths should never be exploited for political gain. It is ghoulish.
Improved road safety is more about education and enforcement than it is about creating new segregation.
I appreciate that there are good drivers and bad drivers. There are good cyclists and bad cyclists.
A couple of times a week, I drive someone into central Oxford so they can get to work. Mobility issues preventing them from getting there without a vehicle. On each trip, I always see a number of cyclists jumping red lights, using mobile phones whilst cycling, wearing headphones and so forth. All of which comprise their safety. But in the event of an accident, the vehicle driver will now be assumed liable.
If cycling is to be given greater prominence in terms of road planning, cyclists will have to be subject to greater scrutiny in terms of their of own responsibilities. A complete ban on the use of mobile devices/headphones would be a start. Proper cycling education would seem desirable along with a requirement for a certain type of light, reflective clothing and helmets
Road use should be about respect, responsibility and governed by fair enforcement.
No one wants road deaths. Everyone has their part to play in this.
I think we're arguing to achieve the same conclusion here - safe and responsible transportation is best for everyone - but I do disagree with some of your points.
Complete ban on mobile devices would be impossible to enforce; and tbh I'd be willing to bet it's the more responsible road users who use them - typically for journey planning and fitness tracking via Garmin, Strava etc.
Also I'm not sure I see the reason why folk driving cars can use Sat Nav and Spotify and somehow be less distracted? Like most people who sometimes cycle, I sometimes drive a car too. It strikes me that the consequences of inattentive driving are likely to be more serious than inattentive cycling (or walking). Having been hit twice by drivers (in both cases turning suddenly without indicating or checking mirrors - which they will certainly have been educated to do, btw), the supposed liability of those drivers for my injuries was kind of moot as they just drove off leaving me in the road.
And, as has been pointed out elsewhere ad nauseam, in cities and countries where cycling has genuinely become a commonplace routine form of transport for all, no special clothing is required (in fact you look a bit weird if you have it).
As an aside, the less prominence given to cycling in road planning the better, as the resulting infrastructure is almost always terrible (in Manchester anyway). Even such a simple consideration as being able to turn right onto a side road is not catered for. Bike routes =/= tram lines.
I have mixed feelings about Truss. Her political views are probably closest to my own - low tax libertarian - but she is obviously a terrible public speaker, an even worse debater, and a dreadful media perfomer. I don't see her winning a GE unless she can buy off the electorate with popular policies, but given the economic situation, no candidate will be able to do anything particularly popular for the next two years.
I think/hope the membership will reach the same conclusion when she disintegrates live in front of them at the hustings and televised debates.
Still waiting for a better PM than Blair. He left office in 2007…
We've had 2 better PM's than Blair already since then. Cameron and Boris.
But if you're wanting a better Labour PM, you might need to wait until Labour are popular again. Perhaps Starmer's successor might do it?
ROFL Cameron and Johnson don’t have a candle on Blair. He did actual levelling up and actual positive change.
Johnson and Cameron divided the country and oversaw the largest stagnation in society in 100 years.
This would be the stagnation that has led to record low unemployment?
Record low but Kemi says more people are sitting around and doing nothing. Makes no sense.
Full employment where 40% of people on benefits are IN WORK.
As @BartholomewRoberts would point out if he was here - if you are on benefits there is absolutely zero point working beyond the point income is clawed back...
Problem is there is no easy way to fix that without seriously increasing the cut off point at which people can no longer claim benefits (probably to something like £40-45,000 from £30,000).
In idle moments, I try and think of ways of *temporarily increasing benefits* to those who earn money while on benefits.
If insane marginal tax rates are just about dissuading people to work more, what would doubling the money they earn do?
The problem is to prevent it being gamed.
UBI with progressive taxation. Ensures nobody should be in poverty, can't be gamed and always an incentive to work.
Kemi: "My government will discard the priorities of Twitter and deliver on the people's priorities."
Kemi: "Every quango leader should be sackable by a democratic minister."
She is literally insane. These issues are not important to anyone.
The quango'isation of government should be a concern - it is about removing accountability in the spending of public money using "independence" as a fig leaf. It also is quite handy in a chumocracy as a way to employ friends and family without the hassle of it being too obvious.
Is not another element the use of charitable status to gain tax advantages?
There is also a big problem with conflicts of interest, which are at the heart of a lot of scandals.
The layering - using multiple layers of NGOs, charities and Quangos to do things - is perfectly designed to obfuscate such conflicts of interest.
Almost as if it was design for that.
Quango = quasi-autonomous... Their independence is a convenient fiction that only works if we all believe in it.
None of the leadership contenders seems to be talking about levelling up. Focus seems to be on shrinking the state, which helps London and the SE. Have the Tories given up on the Red Wall, or do they hope that going large on Chicks with Dicks will obscure the abandonment of levelling up as a policy objective?
What incentive does the second placed candidate have (assuming Rishi wins the final MP round) to withdraw?
The runner-up might withdraw in exchange for a top job, or stay in and risk the fate of Jeremy Hunt or all the Labour types (eg Yvette Cooper) who boycotted Corbyn and lost to Starmer. The next contest is always about the ones who served, not those who kept their hands clean on the sidelines.
Still waiting for a better PM than Blair. He left office in 2007…
We've had 2 better PM's than Blair already since then. Cameron and Boris.
But if you're wanting a better Labour PM, you might need to wait until Labour are popular again. Perhaps Starmer's successor might do it?
ROFL Cameron and Johnson don’t have a candle on Blair. He did actual levelling up and actual positive change.
Johnson and Cameron divided the country and oversaw the largest stagnation in society in 100 years.
This would be the stagnation that has led to record low unemployment?
Record low but Kemi says more people are sitting around and doing nothing. Makes no sense.
Full employment where 40% of people on benefits are IN WORK.
As @BartholomewRoberts would point out if he was here - if you are on benefits there is absolutely zero point working beyond the point income is clawed back...
Problem is there is no easy way to fix that without seriously increasing the cut off point at which people can no longer claim benefits (probably to something like £40-45,000 from £30,000).
Still waiting for a better PM than Blair. He left office in 2007…
We've had 2 better PM's than Blair already since then. Cameron and Boris.
But if you're wanting a better Labour PM, you might need to wait until Labour are popular again. Perhaps Starmer's successor might do it?
ROFL Cameron and Johnson don’t have a candle on Blair. He did actual levelling up and actual positive change.
Johnson and Cameron divided the country and oversaw the largest stagnation in society in 100 years.
This would be the stagnation that has led to record low unemployment?
Record low but Kemi says more people are sitting around and doing nothing. Makes no sense.
Full employment where 40% of people on benefits are IN WORK.
As @BartholomewRoberts would point out if he was here - if you are on benefits there is absolutely zero point working beyond the point income is clawed back...
Problem is there is no easy way to fix that without seriously increasing the cut off point at which people can no longer claim benefits (probably to something like £40-45,000 from £30,000).
How are people on £30k claiming benefits?!
UC taper. The couple rate only reduces to zero at somewhere over 30k depending on housing.
There is not enough get Truss going in for my liking.
Since Sunday when my dad said he is backing Sunak but is convinced Truss is winning it I have had a 🤢 feeling.
As this is a betting site, we have to tell the betting world Truss is next PM?
I’m praying for Penny, to knock Truss out last two, but European land war and economic crisis no time for a novice is going to count against Penny isn’t it 😩
Penny has been Defence Secretary
For how long was that HY? These elections seem to be bias to whoever is in great offices of state at the moment they happen and experience.
What are you doing to stop Truss getting into last two HY? Otherwise as the preeminent betting site in human universe we have too tell world Truss is on conveyer belt to number 10. And I’m going to blame you for complacency 😠
None of the leadership contenders seems to be talking about levelling up. Focus seems to be on shrinking the state, which helps London and the SE. Have the Tories given up on the Red Wall, or do they hope that going large on Chicks with Dicks will obscure the abandonment of levelling up as a policy objective?
It's gone. There never was a plan, anyway. No there's no money for it even if it existed.
Still waiting for a better PM than Blair. He left office in 2007…
We've had 2 better PM's than Blair already since then. Cameron and Boris.
But if you're wanting a better Labour PM, you might need to wait until Labour are popular again. Perhaps Starmer's successor might do it?
ROFL Cameron and Johnson don’t have a candle on Blair. He did actual levelling up and actual positive change.
Johnson and Cameron divided the country and oversaw the largest stagnation in society in 100 years.
This would be the stagnation that has led to record low unemployment?
Record low but Kemi says more people are sitting around and doing nothing. Makes no sense.
Full employment where 40% of people on benefits are IN WORK.
As @BartholomewRoberts would point out if he was here - if you are on benefits there is absolutely zero point working beyond the point income is clawed back...
Problem is there is no easy way to fix that without seriously increasing the cut off point at which people can no longer claim benefits (probably to something like £40-45,000 from £30,000).
In idle moments, I try and think of ways of *temporarily increasing benefits* to those who earn money while on benefits.
If insane marginal tax rates are just about dissuading people to work more, what would doubling the money they earn do?
The problem is to prevent it being gamed.
UBI with progressive taxation. Ensures nobody should be in poverty, can't be gamed and always an incentive to work.
UBI would require the country to be wealthier than it is now - given the growth curves, within our lifetimes...
The we can do this
1) UBI replaces benefits, tax free allowance, state pension. 2) All income above that taxed. 3) Single income tax (NI abolished)
Ugh all this calling of politicians by their first name makes me want to puke. They’re not my pal, or my colleague, they’re want to be PM. Anyone who tries to make that relationship “chummy” should be disqualified.
I have mixed feelings about Truss. Her political views are probably closest to my own - low tax libertarian - but she is obviously a terrible public speaker, an even worse debater, and a dreadful media perfomer. I don't see her winning a GE unless she can buy off the electorate with popular policies, but given the economic situation, no candidate will be able to do anything particularly popular for the next two years.
I think/hope the membership will reach the same conclusion when she disintegrates live in front of them at the hustings and televised debates.
I think she is slightly underestimated to be honest. A lot of people suggest that she’s thick - I don’t get that impression at all. She does however suffer from a lack of “seriousness” which is partly as a result of the infamous cheese speech and partly as a result of her Instagram antics.
I don’t think she’s the best choice for next Tory leader. I find it difficult to see her winning an election. But I do think she is slightly unfairly pilloried.
None of the leadership contenders seems to be talking about levelling up. Focus seems to be on shrinking the state, which helps London and the SE. Have the Tories given up on the Red Wall, or do they hope that going large on Chicks with Dicks will obscure the abandonment of levelling up as a policy objective?
That isn't going to work when I suspect the Labour manifesto will feature HS2E, NPR and quite possibly given the state of Parliament a plan to move Parliament to Manchester
* Can't really be Birmingham for reasons and as others have pointed out if you move it to a small place it will total dominate the town / city but would leave whole piles of things in London.
Kemi: "My government will discard the priorities of Twitter and deliver on the people's priorities."
Kemi: "Every quango leader should be sackable by a democratic minister."
She is literally insane. These issues are not important to anyone.
The quango'isation of government should be a concern - it is about removing accountability in the spending of public money using "independence" as a fig leaf. It also is quite handy in a chumocracy as a way to employ friends and family without the hassle of it being too obvious.
Is not another element the use of charitable status to gain tax advantages?
There is also a big problem with conflicts of interest, which are at the heart of a lot of scandals.
The layering - using multiple layers of NGOs, charities and Quangos to do things - is perfectly designed to obfuscate such conflicts of interest.
Almost as if it was design for that.
It is the next big scandal. Some journalists have sniffed around it. It's one thing I'd be looking at. A lot of "charities" and quangos are very smelly indeed. If I were PM and looking at charity law, a lot of charities would be quaking in their boots.
One thing I would like the next PM to do is to place the various ethics advisors on a statutory footing, reporting to Parliament and give them the power to initiate investigations independently (with a proper professional team of investigators not civil servants doing this off the side of their desks). If they could get cross-party backing for these changes, so much the better.
You're just trying to get a job offer, aren't you? Head Investigator, Ethics.
I'd be brilliant at it as well.
But I have just been offered a contract which will involve me writing some articles, amongst other things, and some look like they will be in the FT, if it all comes off. So they'll need to get a move on.
Its not just the 20mph, its the blanket nature of the policy. Absolutely no need for it to be 20mph at 3am...the argument about runners or kids, there isn't any at that time.
The US system of having 30mph, then at certain times e.g. school times, its 20mph seems a perfectly sensible comprise.
It isn't really a blanket policy, though:
The Welsh government have acknowledged the new lower limit won't be appropriate everywhere and local authorities can make exceptions, though not outside schools.
And the autonomy can only be increased in the process, I think.
Think about all the money that will no longer need to be spent on traffic calming, and cane be spent more usefully.
Lets see, I bet its 20mph basically everywhere, as the argument will always be think of the kids...its like new temporary taxes, they only ever become permanent and go up.
I'd say that I would quite like a blanket-except-for-through-routes 20mph - eg in London, except for Red Routes.
But the real future is segregation of modes, plus limiting motor-vehicles in shared spaces so that mixing is safe for others.
The safety issue is exaggerated by the cycling lobby. That is not to say that there are no safety issues when it comes to the interaction between two wheeled vehicles and those with 4 or more.
But the number of cycling fatalities has been falling in the UK for a long time even though cycling has been increasing.
The cycling lobby here in Oxford almost seem to relish a tragic accident. One of their number collects old bikes, sprays them white and ties them up next to the site of the accident within hours.
Road deaths should never be exploited for political gain. It is ghoulish.
Improved road safety is more about education and enforcement than it is about creating new segregation.
I appreciate that there are good drivers and bad drivers. There are good cyclists and bad cyclists.
A couple of times a week, I drive someone into central Oxford so they can get to work. Mobility issues preventing them from getting there without a vehicle. On each trip, I always see a number of cyclists jumping red lights, using mobile phones whilst cycling, wearing headphones and so forth. All of which comprise their safety. But in the event of an accident, the vehicle driver will now be assumed liable.
If cycling is to be given greater prominence in terms of road planning, cyclists will have to be subject to greater scrutiny in terms of their of own responsibilities. A complete ban on the use of mobile devices/headphones would be a start. Proper cycling education would seem desirable along with a requirement for a certain type of light, reflective clothing and helmets
Road use should be about respect, responsibility and governed by fair enforcement.
No one wants road deaths. Everyone has their part to play in this.
I think we're arguing to achieve the same conclusion here - safe and responsible transportation is best for everyone - but I do disagree with some of your points.
Complete ban on mobile devices would be impossible to enforce; and tbh I'd be willing to bet it's the more responsible road users who use them - typically for journey planning and fitness tracking via Garmin, Strava etc.
Also I'm not sure I see the reason why folk driving cars can use Sat Nav and Spotify and somehow be less distracted? Like most people who sometimes cycle, I sometimes drive a car too. It strikes me that the consequences of inattentive driving are likely to be more serious than inattentive cycling (or walking). Having been hit twice by drivers (in both cases turning suddenly without indicating or checking mirrors - which they will certainly have been educated to do, btw), the supposed liability of those drivers for my injuries was kind of moot as they just drove off leaving me in the road.
And, as has been pointed out elsewhere ad nauseam, in cities and countries where cycling has genuinely become a commonplace routine form of transport for all, no special clothing is required (in fact you look a bit weird if you have it).
As an aside, the less prominence given to cycling in road planning the better, as the resulting infrastructure is almost always terrible (in Manchester anyway). Even such a simple consideration as being able to turn right onto a side road is not catered for. Bike routes =/= tram lines.
Using headphones massively reduces situation awareness for both cyclists and drivers. They should be banned.
If you are using fitness device, set it before you set off. Staring at your watch while riding a bike, let alone fiddling with it, is a bad idea.
Ugh all this calling of politicians by their first name makes me want to puke. They’re not my pal, or my colleague, they’re want to be PM. Anyone who tries to make that relationship “chummy” should be disqualified.
Quite right too. @kinabalu used to moan that to use 'Boris' was to succumb to the man's Svengali-like principles and/or sign up to his entire programme (I paraphrase, but I agree very much with K.) But K. has given up of late.
I can believe it. Do we think he can recover amongst members once it gets going?
I think Sunak will lose when it comes down to *whoever* is in the last two. The numbers seem to indicate that the "stop Sunak" vote is larger than the "pro Sunak" vote.
Although you also need to bear mind that there will also be a substantial 'Stop Liz' vote. 'Stop Penny' perhaps less so, but she might well fade as members begin to realise how inexperienced she is in terms of top-level politics.
Tom Tugendhat is a bit of a wild card in all this, although also inexperienced.
I suppose it is too much to hope that if Rishi mentions it enough some members will vaguely remember when the Tories took management of the economy and public finances seriously? Some nostalgic feeling for the good old days?
Still waiting for a better PM than Blair. He left office in 2007…
We've had 2 better PM's than Blair already since then. Cameron and Boris.
But if you're wanting a better Labour PM, you might need to wait until Labour are popular again. Perhaps Starmer's successor might do it?
ROFL Cameron and Johnson don’t have a candle on Blair. He did actual levelling up and actual positive change.
Johnson and Cameron divided the country and oversaw the largest stagnation in society in 100 years.
This would be the stagnation that has led to record low unemployment?
Record low but Kemi says more people are sitting around and doing nothing. Makes no sense.
Full employment where 40% of people on benefits are IN WORK.
As @BartholomewRoberts would point out if he was here - if you are on benefits there is absolutely zero point working beyond the point income is clawed back...
Problem is there is no easy way to fix that without seriously increasing the cut off point at which people can no longer claim benefits (probably to something like £40-45,000 from £30,000).
In idle moments, I try and think of ways of *temporarily increasing benefits* to those who earn money while on benefits.
If insane marginal tax rates are just about dissuading people to work more, what would doubling the money they earn do?
The problem is to prevent it being gamed.
UBI with progressive taxation. Ensures nobody should be in poverty, can't be gamed and always an incentive to work.
UBI would require the country to be wealthier than it is now - given the growth curves, within our lifetimes...
The we can do this
1) UBI replaces benefits, tax free allowance, state pension. 2) All income above that taxed. 3) Single income tax (NI abolished)
The tax code can be written on a postcard.
Sounds like too much hard work with too many losers.
None of the leadership contenders seems to be talking about levelling up. Focus seems to be on shrinking the state, which helps London and the SE. Have the Tories given up on the Red Wall, or do they hope that going large on Chicks with Dicks will obscure the abandonment of levelling up as a policy objective?
That isn't going to work when I suspect the Labour manifesto will feature HS2E, NPR and quite possibly given the state of Parliament a plan to move Parliament to Manchester
* Can't really be Birmingham for reasons and as others have pointed out if you move it to a small place it will total dominate the town / city but would leave whole piles of things in London.
Still waiting for a better PM than Blair. He left office in 2007…
We've had 2 better PM's than Blair already since then. Cameron and Boris.
But if you're wanting a better Labour PM, you might need to wait until Labour are popular again. Perhaps Starmer's successor might do it?
ROFL Cameron and Johnson don’t have a candle on Blair. He did actual levelling up and actual positive change.
Johnson and Cameron divided the country and oversaw the largest stagnation in society in 100 years.
This would be the stagnation that has led to record low unemployment?
Record low but Kemi says more people are sitting around and doing nothing. Makes no sense.
Full employment where 40% of people on benefits are IN WORK.
As @BartholomewRoberts would point out if he was here - if you are on benefits there is absolutely zero point working beyond the point income is clawed back...
Problem is there is no easy way to fix that without seriously increasing the cut off point at which people can no longer claim benefits (probably to something like £40-45,000 from £30,000).
It’s odd that this only changed after 2010
To a certain extent it was true before then. The advantage to be personally is I was able to reduce my working hours when I became a single parent, and the loss of post-tax, and post -tax credit, income was relatively modest.
That's was a good thing for me and my daughter, but it has other negative consequences too.
Ugh all this calling of politicians by their first name makes me want to puke. They’re not my pal, or my colleague, they’re want to be PM. Anyone who tries to make that relationship “chummy” should be disqualified.
Still waiting for a better PM than Blair. He left office in 2007…
We've had 2 better PM's than Blair already since then. Cameron and Boris.
But if you're wanting a better Labour PM, you might need to wait until Labour are popular again. Perhaps Starmer's successor might do it?
ROFL Cameron and Johnson don’t have a candle on Blair. He did actual levelling up and actual positive change.
Johnson and Cameron divided the country and oversaw the largest stagnation in society in 100 years.
This would be the stagnation that has led to record low unemployment?
Record low but Kemi says more people are sitting around and doing nothing. Makes no sense.
Full employment where 40% of people on benefits are IN WORK.
As @BartholomewRoberts would point out if he was here - if you are on benefits there is absolutely zero point working beyond the point income is clawed back...
Problem is there is no easy way to fix that without seriously increasing the cut off point at which people can no longer claim benefits (probably to something like £40-45,000 from £30,000).
In idle moments, I try and think of ways of *temporarily increasing benefits* to those who earn money while on benefits.
If insane marginal tax rates are just about dissuading people to work more, what would doubling the money they earn do?
The problem is to prevent it being gamed.
UBI with progressive taxation. Ensures nobody should be in poverty, can't be gamed and always an incentive to work.
UBI would require the country to be wealthier than it is now - given the growth curves, within our lifetimes...
The we can do this
1) UBI replaces benefits, tax free allowance, state pension. 2) All income above that taxed. 3) Single income tax (NI abolished)
The tax code can be written on a postcard.
For all the positive theory of UBI, it is certainty that politicians will get hold of it and then we will get the Gordon Brown effect, oh I have found such and such group of people who I think would benefit from some extra funding, so I am going to have a special extra UBI payment for ....and in doing so a group of people who don't need it also get extra....5-10 years down the line and you back in their perverse situation where some people because of unique circumstances are getting extra + extra + extra on their UBI.
What incentive does the second placed candidate have (assuming Rishi wins the final MP round) to withdraw?
The runner-up might withdraw in exchange for a top job, or stay in and risk the fate of Jeremy Hunt or all the Labour types (eg Yvette Cooper) who boycotted Corbyn and lost to Starmer. The next contest is always about the ones who served, not those who kept their hands clean on the sidelines.
There was nothing inevitable about Jeremy Hunt’s fate - he turned down an offer of a cabinet role by Boris.
If you’re second placed against someone you consider to be beatable then I don’t see a situation where you would withdraw.
If we get a few more polls suggesting someone like Liz would lose to Rishi in a landslide then maybe I would see it. But in the current febrile and uncertain situation it doesn’t seem likely to me.
None of the leadership contenders seems to be talking about levelling up. Focus seems to be on shrinking the state, which helps London and the SE. Have the Tories given up on the Red Wall, or do they hope that going large on Chicks with Dicks will obscure the abandonment of levelling up as a policy objective?
It's gone. There never was a plan, anyway. No there's no money for it even if it existed.
Indeed.
One might as well ask "Post-Cameron, where now for his Big Society project?"
Its not just the 20mph, its the blanket nature of the policy. Absolutely no need for it to be 20mph at 3am...the argument about runners or kids, there isn't any at that time.
The US system of having 30mph, then at certain times e.g. school times, its 20mph seems a perfectly sensible comprise.
It isn't really a blanket policy, though:
The Welsh government have acknowledged the new lower limit won't be appropriate everywhere and local authorities can make exceptions, though not outside schools.
And the autonomy can only be increased in the process, I think.
Think about all the money that will no longer need to be spent on traffic calming, and cane be spent more usefully.
Lets see, I bet its 20mph basically everywhere, as the argument will always be think of the kids...its like new temporary taxes, they only ever become permanent and go up.
I'd say that I would quite like a blanket-except-for-through-routes 20mph - eg in London, except for Red Routes.
But the real future is segregation of modes, plus limiting motor-vehicles in shared spaces so that mixing is safe for others.
The safety issue is exaggerated by the cycling lobby. That is not to say that there are no safety issues when it comes to the interaction between two wheeled vehicles and those with 4 or more.
But the number of cycling fatalities has been falling in the UK for a long time even though cycling has been increasing.
The cycling lobby here in Oxford almost seem to relish a tragic accident. One of their number collects old bikes, sprays them white and ties them up next to the site of the accident within hours.
Road deaths should never be exploited for political gain. It is ghoulish.
Improved road safety is more about education and enforcement than it is about creating new segregation.
I appreciate that there are good drivers and bad drivers. There are good cyclists and bad cyclists.
A couple of times a week, I drive someone into central Oxford so they can get to work. Mobility issues preventing them from getting there without a vehicle. On each trip, I always see a number of cyclists jumping red lights, using mobile phones whilst cycling, wearing headphones and so forth. All of which comprise their safety. But in the event of an accident, the vehicle driver will now be assumed liable.
If cycling is to be given greater prominence in terms of road planning, cyclists will have to be subject to greater scrutiny in terms of their of own responsibilities. A complete ban on the use of mobile devices/headphones would be a start. Proper cycling education would seem desirable along with a requirement for a certain type of light, reflective clothing and helmets
Road use should be about respect, responsibility and governed by fair enforcement.
No one wants road deaths. Everyone has their part to play in this.
I think we're arguing to achieve the same conclusion here - safe and responsible transportation is best for everyone - but I do disagree with some of your points.
Complete ban on mobile devices would be impossible to enforce; and tbh I'd be willing to bet it's the more responsible road users who use them - typically for journey planning and fitness tracking via Garmin, Strava etc.
Also I'm not sure I see the reason why folk driving cars can use Sat Nav and Spotify and somehow be less distracted? Like most people who sometimes cycle, I sometimes drive a car too. It strikes me that the consequences of inattentive driving are likely to be more serious than inattentive cycling (or walking). Having been hit twice by drivers (in both cases turning suddenly without indicating or checking mirrors - which they will certainly have been educated to do, btw), the supposed liability of those drivers for my injuries was kind of moot as they just drove off leaving me in the road.
And, as has been pointed out elsewhere ad nauseam, in cities and countries where cycling has genuinely become a commonplace routine form of transport for all, no special clothing is required (in fact you look a bit weird if you have it).
As an aside, the less prominence given to cycling in road planning the better, as the resulting infrastructure is almost always terrible (in Manchester anyway). Even such a simple consideration as being able to turn right onto a side road is not catered for. Bike routes =/= tram lines.
I am fine with using devices fixed to the cycle that require no interaction whilst moving. But cycling whilst texting or holding the phone to make a car is just wrong but not currently illegal.
I strongly disagree with your position on clothing and helmets. It should be commonplace to be as visible as possible because cycling isn't just restricted to dedicated areas in major urban centres. It needs to cover all eventualities and so asking all cyclists to be as visible as possible is not a major step and it is better to have a one size fits all approach rather than leaving it to the discretion of the cyclist.
I have mixed feelings about Truss. Her political views are probably closest to my own - low tax libertarian - but she is obviously a terrible public speaker, an even worse debater, and a dreadful media perfomer. I don't see her winning a GE unless she can buy off the electorate with popular policies, but given the economic situation, no candidate will be able to do anything particularly popular for the next two years.
I think/hope the membership will reach the same conclusion when she disintegrates live in front of them at the hustings and televised debates.
I think she is slightly underestimated to be honest. A lot of people suggest that she’s thick - I don’t get that impression at all. She does however suffer from a lack of “seriousness” which is partly as a result of the infamous cheese speech and partly as a result of her Instagram antics.
I don’t think she’s the best choice for next Tory leader. I find it difficult to see her winning an election. But I do think she is slightly unfairly pilloried.
She's a seriously poor speaker. Like Javid. That doesn't equate to "thick" at all. But it does create that impression. Look at all the Boris fans who seem to insist he's the closest thing to Isaac Newton this country has produced in 500 years. Because he's able to use long and obscure words.
Britain will be represented abroad by a man who could walk under a grasshopper
At least, I suppose, he’s better than Ben Wallace
How tall are you @Leon ? I am guessing you are all of 1 inch taller than Sunak based on that picture the other day that included your shoes. Unless you are a reverse Hobbit perhaps?
I have mixed feelings about Truss. Her political views are probably closest to my own - low tax libertarian - but she is obviously a terrible public speaker, an even worse debater, and a dreadful media perfomer. I don't see her winning a GE unless she can buy off the electorate with popular policies, but given the economic situation, no candidate will be able to do anything particularly popular for the next two years.
I think/hope the membership will reach the same conclusion when she disintegrates live in front of them at the hustings and televised debates.
I think she is slightly underestimated to be honest. A lot of people suggest that she’s thick - I don’t get that impression at all. She does however suffer from a lack of “seriousness” which is partly as a result of the infamous cheese speech and partly as a result of her Instagram antics.
I don’t think she’s the best choice for next Tory leader. I find it difficult to see her winning an election. But I do think she is slightly unfairly pilloried.
She's a seriously poor speaker. Like Javid. That doesn't equate to "thick" at all. But it does create that impression. Look at all the Boris fans who seem to insist he's the closest thing to Isaac Newton this country has produced in 500 years. Because he's able to use long and obscure words.
Surely "the closest thing to Isaac Newton this country has produced in 500 years" is Isaac Newton?
Its not just the 20mph, its the blanket nature of the policy. Absolutely no need for it to be 20mph at 3am...the argument about runners or kids, there isn't any at that time.
The US system of having 30mph, then at certain times e.g. school times, its 20mph seems a perfectly sensible comprise.
Out of interest the much sighted 30mph kills kids / 20 mph saves them, how many kids are killed as pedestrians on the road each year? I have no idea.
Blanket policies are beloved of bureaucrats and technocrats.
He always was- it's just that sometimes he had a good editor.
You want a historical butterfly- what if the director of THAT episode of Have I Got News For You got the runs that afternoon, and was replaced by an inferior standin?
What incentive does the second placed candidate have (assuming Rishi wins the final MP round) to withdraw?
If they're confident they'll win the member's vote, none, unless they never wanted to be PM now and only wanted a strong showing to use to win a big Cabinet job. That and it gets rid of Johnson more quickly.
I wouldn’t be surprised if after this election there are calls to ban the Tory membership from a role in the process. Particularly when they are in Govt. We’re going to end up with somebody with no serious Govt or political experience on the basis of not being somebody else and or saying things people like.
There’s a reason people don’t usually get catapulted into the top jobs and ideally have a range of roles in Govt beforehand. It should actually give them a real world view of what can and can’t be delivered, and the difficulties of doing so.
Furthermore a new leader can’t just take a “mandate” from the party as replacing the mandate given to the Conservatives by a General Election. They can bring a new focus to non policy related issues (honesty, integrity etc etc) but broadly the policy direction is set absent a new election.
Its not just the 20mph, its the blanket nature of the policy. Absolutely no need for it to be 20mph at 3am...the argument about runners or kids, there isn't any at that time.
The US system of having 30mph, then at certain times e.g. school times, its 20mph seems a perfectly sensible comprise.
Out of interest the much sighted 30mph kills kids / 20 mph saves them, how many kids are killed as pedestrians on the road each year? I have no idea.
Blanket policies are beloved of bureaucrats and technocrats.
Roads where bikes go faster than cars are really dangerous. There are 20mph hills near me where driving down is quite scary. So much more that drivers have to look out for, and it’s not safe having to spend more time looking in rear view mirrors than on the road in front.
Off thread, but do other posters have a view on this proposed tower in Manchester:
You will not be surprised to learn that Amir Khan is involved.
To my surprise, despite trying, I don't hate it. (I hope I'm not unduly influenced in this by the fact that Sam Wheeler, the Momentum largely anti-development councillor for this part of the city centre, does hate it.) I think the higher the building, the more reflective it needs to be, particularly in a city where sunshine isn't a given, and it will at least be shiny.
Boring, I'm afraid - to my mind. Also, 96% of planned buildings look better in the render than in reality, so that will get worse
That is quite deliberate, I think. And quite a few renders I've seen are from perspectives impossible in real life unless you're airborne. Good architects are rare.
That's not offensive and quite like the part octagon shaping. And it's not that tall really.
Where is it? Are we looking N / NE towards the St. Peter's Square there? Somewhere west of Oxford Road?
It is up near Piccadilly Station, between it and Great Ancoats St. Up there, anything new built would be an improvement and bring the place on a bit. Ancoats itself has had a lot of redevelopment and it looks better for it
It's the colour of it which is dividing opinion. As I said, while I expected to hate it, I don't. And it's better than what's there at the moment (though there are new buildings in Manchester which are better than what was there before but still represent a regrettable missed opportunity, and in this area of town I would expect something else to come forward if this does not). For me, it passes the test - but I can see why it's controversial.
I have to say, I prefer Liverpool's skyline. There are some really interesting buildings around the city centre
London has the most interesting buildings in the country but overall it's a mess. Manchester needs to decide quickly whether it wants to follow London or Paris, where most buildings are half a dozen storeys high and you can see the Eiffel Tower from a distance. Not sure why we should be able to guess Amir Khan is involved.
I suspect it's already too late for that for Manchester - Equally what exactly is the Manchester equivalent to the Eiffel Tower or even La Défense.
Perhaps it should build one.
Manchester - like Birmingham - has an inauspicious topography for a great city. No harbour, no hills, no great river.
The best thing about Manchester is the unmistakeable dark-red warehouses that tower above you.
They should riff on that form more. Hamburg (and to a lesser extent Amsterdam) have interesting bricken design.
Comments
Full employment where 40% of people on benefits are IN WORK.
Imagine all the time that we can save.
Problem is there is no easy way to fix that without seriously increasing the cut off point at which people can no longer claim benefits (probably to something like £40-45,000 from £30,000).
I think the problem Sunak has is that nobody is talking about the state of the public finances. That COVID has reset the equation has completely passed most people by.
Almost as if it was design for that.
BBC News - Heathrow limits passenger numbers over summer
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-62136022
They've told airlines to stop selling tickets.
If insane marginal tax rates are just about dissuading people to work more, what would doubling the money they earn do?
The problem is to prevent it being gamed.
Tom Tugendhat is a bit of a wild card in all this, although also inexperienced.
In my opinion, it’s insane not to have a sane and detailed economic planning right at the top on number ten chalk board. Boris Johnson was just back of the fag packet economic strategy planning and bluster - the number 1 most important thing to change from his going is that isn’t it? What is the bleeping point if that don’t change 🤷♀️
Honestly, they could do with listening to me on lots of things instead of the dimwit Spads they seem to rely on. They largely seem incapable of boiling an egg.
Complete ban on mobile devices would be impossible to enforce; and tbh I'd be willing to bet it's the more responsible road users who use them - typically for journey planning and fitness tracking via Garmin, Strava etc.
Also I'm not sure I see the reason why folk driving cars can use Sat Nav and Spotify and somehow be less distracted? Like most people who sometimes cycle, I sometimes drive a car too. It strikes me that the consequences of inattentive driving are likely to be more serious than inattentive cycling (or walking). Having been hit twice by drivers (in both cases turning suddenly without indicating or checking mirrors - which they will certainly have been educated to do, btw), the supposed liability of those drivers for my injuries was kind of moot as they just drove off leaving me in the road.
And, as has been pointed out elsewhere ad nauseam, in cities and countries where cycling has genuinely become a commonplace routine form of transport for all, no special clothing is required (in fact you look a bit weird if you have it).
As an aside, the less prominence given to cycling in road planning the better, as the resulting infrastructure is almost always terrible (in Manchester anyway). Even such a simple consideration as being able to turn right onto a side road is not catered for. Bike routes =/= tram lines.
I think/hope the membership will reach the same conclusion when she disintegrates live in front of them at the hustings and televised debates.
EG:
'Net Zero is unilateral economic disarmament'
What a line.......Genius.....F8cking genius.
The other is likely to be the father.
Britain will be represented abroad by a man who could walk under a grasshopper
At least, I suppose, he’s better than Ben Wallace
Anyone backed by Rees-Mogg and Dorries doesn’t deserve to go through
(With the possible exception of PB.)
What are you doing to stop Truss getting into last two HY? Otherwise as the preeminent betting site in human universe we have too tell world Truss is on conveyer belt to number 10. And I’m going to blame you for complacency 😠
There never was a plan, anyway.
No there's no money for it even if it existed.
Yes.
The we can do this
1) UBI replaces benefits, tax free allowance, state pension.
2) All income above that taxed.
3) Single income tax (NI abolished)
The tax code can be written on a postcard.
The MPs clearly want him. The conhome polls show he would lose to even second rank rivals in a two horse race.
Everybody knows him and yet he can only manage third in the conhome poll.
I don’t think she’s the best choice for next Tory leader. I find it difficult to see her winning an election. But I do think she is slightly unfairly pilloried.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/boris-johnson-has-not-ruled-out-making-comeback-vtrjqwczf (£££)
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/my-plan-to-give-britain-a-better-future
* Can't really be Birmingham for reasons and as others have pointed out if you move it to a small place it will total dominate the town / city but would leave whole piles of things in London.
But I have just been offered a contract which will involve me writing some articles, amongst other things, and some look like they will be in the FT, if it all comes off. So they'll need to get a move on.
If you are using fitness device, set it before you set off. Staring at your watch while riding a bike, let alone fiddling with it, is a bad idea.
New Thread
That's was a good thing for me and my daughter, but it has other negative consequences too.
If you’re second placed against someone you consider to be beatable then I don’t see a situation where you would withdraw.
If we get a few more polls suggesting someone like Liz would lose to Rishi in a landslide then maybe I would see it. But in the current febrile and uncertain situation it doesn’t seem likely to me.
One might as well ask "Post-Cameron, where now for his Big Society project?"
In the bin is where.
I strongly disagree with your position on clothing and helmets. It should be commonplace to be as visible as possible because cycling isn't just restricted to dedicated areas in major urban centres. It needs to cover all eventualities and so asking all cyclists to be as visible as possible is not a major step and it is better to have a one size fits all approach rather than leaving it to the discretion of the cyclist.
That doesn't equate to "thick" at all. But it does create that impression.
Look at all the Boris fans who seem to insist he's the closest thing to Isaac Newton this country has produced in 500 years. Because he's able to use long and obscure words.
You want a historical butterfly- what if the director of THAT episode of Have I Got News For You got the runs that afternoon, and was replaced by an inferior standin?
He's an arse. He ums and ahs. He wings it in a way that causes problems. He says stuff I disagree with rather a lot.
But as an orator he is pretty engaging and even charismatic. I don't feel the need to claim he isn't just because I dislike the bloke.
There’s a reason people don’t usually get catapulted into the top jobs and ideally have a range of roles in Govt beforehand. It should actually give them a real world view of what can and can’t be delivered, and the difficulties of doing so.
Furthermore a new leader can’t just take a “mandate” from the party as replacing the mandate given to the Conservatives by a General Election. They can bring a new focus to non policy related issues (honesty, integrity etc etc) but broadly the policy direction is set absent a new election.
Manchester - like Birmingham - has an inauspicious topography for a great city. No harbour, no hills, no great river.
The best thing about Manchester is the unmistakeable dark-red warehouses that tower above you.
They should riff on that form more.
Hamburg (and to a lesser extent Amsterdam) have interesting bricken design.